I like how, when faced with decades of research on the CO2 - global warming connection, the anti-AWG crowd are completely skeptical.
That's because there is also decades of opposing evidence as well as convincing criticism of many of the pro-AWG conclusions. Hell, even the lead scientist of the study on those drowning polar bears in Al Gore's movie is now on administrative leave after a federal investigation into the fact that all he saw was four corpses from 1,500 feet up in a helicopter--no actual collection or study done. It's not as black-and-white and obvious as you seem to believe.
But, a hint that cosmic rays might affect cloud formation and climate change, and they're already convinced.
I think it's more interesting that, at the slightest hint that your current model of global warming may not be entirely accurate, you write a reactionary defensive post that leads into other tangents and doesn't actually respond to the research about cosmic rays affecting climate change.
There is a certain closed-mindedness to anything other than the current dogma in certain circles.
Just look at the negative moderation of your post. Certain people have latched onto current climate change dogma so strongly that it's become a source of self-worth for them, proof of how much smarter they are than the "deniers." Nobody is even allowed to offer a calm, opposing opinion supported by evidence.
If your car is used in a drive-by shooting, your car will get impounded by investigators. It's not "harassment" to seize computer hardware used in a criminal act.
Slashdotters like you hate tablets because you can't let go of the PC. The thought of a world where PCs are a niche is scary to you. It's a nerd playground you've spent years learning, and now it's becoming obsolete for most users.
Slashdot's positive/negative karma system ensures that a specific viewpoint coagulates and eventually governs the comments section. You're obviously aware of the impact of group moderation on an account since you're posting anonymously.
Democrats controlled Congress and the executive branch; and Obama, Pelosi, and Reid led the liberal supermajority. The only problem was those pesky blue dogs who were trying to remind their party that obsessing over universal healthcare all year while voter polls showed concern over unemployment wasn't such a great idea.
If you're one of those guys who argues that Obama isn't a liberal, you're doing what conservatives did when they accused Bush of not being a conservative.
Just look at those silly C++ programmers letting the compiler manage the stack for them. Once they've programmed in C++ for a few months, they'll never be able to manually set up call stacks in assembly across multiple operating systems and instruction sets.
Do you believe, not having to close unlock things makes you a better programmer? or that developer of Java will magically make it so there are no issues like (unnoticeable but cumulative) effects on performance, keeping the file open longer than it needs to be or having to reopen it?
I believe not having bugs makes you a better programmer, and if the language helps enforce that by design, even better. If you're trying to prove yourself by doing things manually that computers are capable of handling for you, you're programming for the wrong reasons. Users don't give a shit how you made the product; just that it doesn't crash or leak.
In the 50s and 60s, programmers were skeptical of using a high-level programming language in place of assembly, but the productivity and understandability increase was too great to ignore. Today, using assembly is frowned upon expect in very specific situations. In fact, compilers are generally regarded as being capable of doing a better job than a human could.
The computer exists to do work for you, and that inevitably includes managing its own memory. Automatic memory management in some form is an inevitable future for most application programming.
I wrote that the web is their means of advertising, so I'm not sure why you're asking me if they should be selling physical billboard space. Sure, I guess they could do that if they thought it would be profitable and they could find a way to make it context-sensitive. It's not like they never expand beyond the web; look at their driverless car. However, they built their advertising model on web technology, and if you look at their financials, that's where the vast majority of their revenue is coming from.
The search engine began as a project at Stanford, but Google the publicly traded company is based on selling ad space.
Google doesn't care whether you have high-speed access.
Well, they care to the degree that it drives more Google ad views. However, their PR department has been quite successful in convincing techies that everything they do is in the name of engineering and open technology rather than driving their core business of web ads.
The problem is that Google has a search monopoly and is leveraging it in more and more services to lock people in. Google is practically the gatekeeper of the web, and it's not even an open source search engine. It's surprising that there isn't more outcry from the FSF crowd over the fact that a closed-source platform now drives almost all web traffic.
I'm sure nothing could go wrong in encouraging the gatekeepers of the web with a closed-source monopoly platform on search and advertising, as well as a history of privacy issues, to become your ISP.
I don't think people realize how much that web advertising drives Google. If you look at their financial reports, it's the majority of their revenue. They're not so much an IT company as they are an advertising company that happens to use IT.
If only America would elect a liberal supermajority for Congress followed by a liberal president so that all that stuff could easily get solved. Oh, wait...
Absolutely nobody outside tech websites cares about "openness." People like you who have been reading Slashdot every day have gotten a warped sense of the world. The majority of consumers want to use a clean, simple product. You want a complicated nerd playground because you see computers as big toys. Apple's goal of accessibility has made the world of computing better and has been guiding much of the industry for decades now.
Some of your accusations don't even make sense. Attacks on reporters? You mean the Gizmodo guy who bought stolen property?
Let's take seriously the opinion of someone who uses the term "iCrap." As for Woz, he's a goofball who just wants to ride around and play polo on his Segway.
I know you're a dumb troll, but Slashdot has actually turned sharply against Apple since Android came out. Basically, the site is opposed to any of Google's direct competitors, even if they once admired them.
Slashdot Mirror
That's because there is also decades of opposing evidence as well as convincing criticism of many of the pro-AWG conclusions. Hell, even the lead scientist of the study on those drowning polar bears in Al Gore's movie is now on administrative leave after a federal investigation into the fact that all he saw was four corpses from 1,500 feet up in a helicopter--no actual collection or study done. It's not as black-and-white and obvious as you seem to believe.
I think it's more interesting that, at the slightest hint that your current model of global warming may not be entirely accurate, you write a reactionary defensive post that leads into other tangents and doesn't actually respond to the research about cosmic rays affecting climate change.
Something everyone here should see: George Carlin on saving the planet
Just look at the negative moderation of your post. Certain people have latched onto current climate change dogma so strongly that it's become a source of self-worth for them, proof of how much smarter they are than the "deniers." Nobody is even allowed to offer a calm, opposing opinion supported by evidence.
If your car is used in a drive-by shooting, your car will get impounded by investigators. It's not "harassment" to seize computer hardware used in a criminal act.
Tell us more about your Human Computer Interaction studies, anonymous poster on Slashdot.
Slashdotters like you hate tablets because you can't let go of the PC. The thought of a world where PCs are a niche is scary to you. It's a nerd playground you've spent years learning, and now it's becoming obsolete for most users.
Slashdot's positive/negative karma system ensures that a specific viewpoint coagulates and eventually governs the comments section. You're obviously aware of the impact of group moderation on an account since you're posting anonymously.
Democrats controlled Congress and the executive branch; and Obama, Pelosi, and Reid led the liberal supermajority. The only problem was those pesky blue dogs who were trying to remind their party that obsessing over universal healthcare all year while voter polls showed concern over unemployment wasn't such a great idea.
If you're one of those guys who argues that Obama isn't a liberal, you're doing what conservatives did when they accused Bush of not being a conservative.
Just look at those silly C++ programmers letting the compiler manage the stack for them. Once they've programmed in C++ for a few months, they'll never be able to manually set up call stacks in assembly across multiple operating systems and instruction sets.
I believe not having bugs makes you a better programmer, and if the language helps enforce that by design, even better. If you're trying to prove yourself by doing things manually that computers are capable of handling for you, you're programming for the wrong reasons. Users don't give a shit how you made the product; just that it doesn't crash or leak.
In the 50s and 60s, programmers were skeptical of using a high-level programming language in place of assembly, but the productivity and understandability increase was too great to ignore. Today, using assembly is frowned upon expect in very specific situations. In fact, compilers are generally regarded as being capable of doing a better job than a human could.
The computer exists to do work for you, and that inevitably includes managing its own memory. Automatic memory management in some form is an inevitable future for most application programming.
Can't argue with that kind of research.
I wrote that the web is their means of advertising, so I'm not sure why you're asking me if they should be selling physical billboard space. Sure, I guess they could do that if they thought it would be profitable and they could find a way to make it context-sensitive. It's not like they never expand beyond the web; look at their driverless car. However, they built their advertising model on web technology, and if you look at their financials, that's where the vast majority of their revenue is coming from.
The search engine began as a project at Stanford, but Google the publicly traded company is based on selling ad space.
Well, they care to the degree that it drives more Google ad views. However, their PR department has been quite successful in convincing techies that everything they do is in the name of engineering and open technology rather than driving their core business of web ads.
The problem is that Google has a search monopoly and is leveraging it in more and more services to lock people in. Google is practically the gatekeeper of the web, and it's not even an open source search engine. It's surprising that there isn't more outcry from the FSF crowd over the fact that a closed-source platform now drives almost all web traffic.
Why would Google be any better?
I'm sure nothing could go wrong in encouraging the gatekeepers of the web with a closed-source monopoly platform on search and advertising, as well as a history of privacy issues, to become your ISP.
I don't think people realize how much that web advertising drives Google. If you look at their financial reports, it's the majority of their revenue. They're not so much an IT company as they are an advertising company that happens to use IT.
This is also why you get things like Google refusing to implement the Do Not Track feature in Chrome as well as the absence of anonymity on Plus.
If only America would elect a liberal supermajority for Congress followed by a liberal president so that all that stuff could easily get solved. Oh, wait...
Imagine the anti-Microsoft shitstorm around here if this was an IIS attack tool.
Maybe they could follow the model Linux fans use and start their own Slashdot to tell them what to think.
It's too bloated with carrier-loaded crapware to move.
Absolutely nobody outside tech websites cares about "openness." People like you who have been reading Slashdot every day have gotten a warped sense of the world. The majority of consumers want to use a clean, simple product. You want a complicated nerd playground because you see computers as big toys. Apple's goal of accessibility has made the world of computing better and has been guiding much of the industry for decades now.
Some of your accusations don't even make sense. Attacks on reporters? You mean the Gizmodo guy who bought stolen property?
Let's take seriously the opinion of someone who uses the term "iCrap." As for Woz, he's a goofball who just wants to ride around and play polo on his Segway.
Steve hasn't been working as CEO since January. He's been on medical leave all this time. I'd say they've been doing well this year.
I know you're a dumb troll, but Slashdot has actually turned sharply against Apple since Android came out. Basically, the site is opposed to any of Google's direct competitors, even if they once admired them.